the school kids in san francisco. don't tolerate bullying, even in the city and county of san francisco, ie the mayor's office doing all the bullying. the kids will remember her, that's how she will go down in her crowning achievement in my humble opinion. ide like to make it a matter of record in my opinion this board of supervisors has neglected three obvious items i've mentioned in the past. we'll see what happens next year. number one, child pornography. number two, the sex slave trade passing through san francisco. and obviously, number three, my number one project, the controversial death of a dead gay man who used to work at san francisco general in 1999, and so far nobody, and i mean nobody, is willing to even discuss his death. i guess when you're gay and you have no voice, then you're expendable. it's kind of interesting that the city of san francisco has been bypassed by the state of washington in regards to gay and related activities. so maybe that's a sign to san francisco that maybe the curse of joe -- is beginning to take its toll. the last thing i would like to say is that t

all over again: san francisco's technology needs a culture shock." >> thank you very much. president chiu. >> thank you mr. chair. i wanted to make a couple of introductory comments and thank you for taking part in this hearing and in particular i want to thank the civil grand jury report for looking at this topic. i decided to bring with me today these folders. these folders represent all of the documents i have been looking at in the last couple of years on this specific topic and in particular let me just title a couple of the reports i have on this. from 2002 from the former executive director from dits, which is the predecessor agency to the department of technology and proposal for management and resources. then go a couple years later the civil grand jury report looked at our technology with hospital "pot holes or possibilities" and a year later the city controller had a letter and said they needed to improve service and performance measures. after that our city analyst did a management audit into their practices and two years later a another analyst looking into the ci

of the board are well aware that in 1973 your predecessors passed a law that made san francisco a transit first city. here we are 40 years later talking about removing a bike lane because there are too many private automobiles that will be going around looking for parking. we're not talking about doing initiatives to improve car share or the hundreds of people who will not have to use a car because of these bike lanes. we're talking about removing a bike lane for private automobiles which is so profoundly idiotic. i think it really boggles the mind. the last point is really to reiterate what i told mta board which is that we're living in a time -- crisis this is a time when we need bold action. we don't need two and a half years of looking at six blocks on fell and oak. we have other cities laughing at us, chicago, minneapolis, portland, new york. i encourage you to reject the appeal. thank you. >> president chiu: walter, his you've already participated in this public comment. no, you can't, actually. thank you. are there any other members of the public that wish to speak in public comment on b

, but the way things are done around here is so embedded in san francisco government culture that the potential benefits to the san francisco community that have been raised, not just by us, are more than ignored. they are mocked by a city administration fearing change. we believe that only the mayor can make the changes that we and others have proposed. no one else has the direct authority over government operations than he has. he can do it if he is willing to put the passionate leadership he puts in attracting tech business to the city and improving the organization and technology within san francisco government. perhaps we have to wait for a different administration for there to be a fair hearing on ways to improve technology. perhaps you, the board of supervisors, can take up this challenge. we hope you will. there was a better ending to our title report, deja vu all over again. that is "where there is a will there is a way .". thank you. >> thank you for the time and effort put into that report. any questions right now president chiu. all right. with that i would like to ask the ma

bikes and it's an integral part. but when you look at san francisco and how the city interacts and the infrastructure these are key areas for both a residential, commercial, and also distribution of thoroughfares through the city so major changes in how it's structured could have a dramatic and material impact on how people get to work and how the city flows. so i think it is important -- as of now, no one really has a thorough understanding of what the impact would be because practically no studies have been done. so before we really make major changes, it is important to go through the steps. and don't put ourselves in a position where we make a -- harmful impact by eliminating some of the major thoroughfares through the city. >> good evening. my name is -- 7:30 pm last night divisadero and oak, bicyclist running a red light, three pedestrians entering the crosswalk, look of shock in their eyes. to avoid hitting anything or anybody, the bicyclist swerved and turned into oncoming traffic. fortunately no one was injured. fortunately nobody was hurt. these types of incidents are

out of the exemption because -- this is the first time in any project in san francisco where you can actually have these raised concrete plantares in the middle of the street in effect which will be safety hazard and so forth, plus all of the parking lots, when you combine the two, would impact each other. but getting back to the -- >> supervisor wiener: do you think any time you add a bike lane does that require an eir? >> any time. >> supervisor wiener: if you add a bike lane to a road that didn't have it before. >> i think there's a pretty good argument that's the case but we don't have to get to that here because you've got the plantares, you've got the fact that -- well what i would say is this particular exemption would not apply if you're putting a bike lane where none exists before because it's a -- it's for existing facilities. the other one is minor alterations and again this is not a minor alteration. you're putting raised concrete plan tars along fell and oak for three blocks of a densely populated congested area and turning it the other direction, if the removal of parki

to save money? is that our goal in san francisco? i suggest to you and i am not embarrassed by the fact we're are the innovation city and it's a lot of money and i think we should be innovative with that money and don't you feel bad because you're government and always a lagger? i don't feel i am. i come from the private sector and i can be as innovative as others and granted i don't have certain challenges and i don't have shareholders breathing down my neck but i have other challenges and remember that most organizations that centralize to do it to save money. most are about the performance they're achieving and they out source to inch krimentally save more money and a cost savings discussion and if we use technology as a driver and this is from the department's perspective i think we're kind of squeezing blood out of a turnip at that point. i think the question is are we getting our money's worth? do we clear clee understand for the money that we spend on it in the city are we achieving what we want to achieve? for that money should you be on the old email system or a new one?

in san francisco and city government and i will say these challenges are not easy to solve but we're not doing our job on the board if we're not willing innovate and drive that home in house so i look forward to this continuing dialogue so we made a number of findings and recommendations. what i am going to do before making a motion i am open it up for public comment. if anyone would like to speak for public comment and we will have two minutes per person. >> great. david pillpow and i was watching this somewhere else and i know you were concerned there was no public comment on item one and i ran over. i have been a participant in coit and i have several points. i spoke back in february at coit and express the strong opinion it was time for mr. walton to be replaced as city cio and director of dt. that was a very strong recommendation. that was not something that i took lightly and apparently something that shocked a number of people and the responses speak on to that. i believe that position, head of dt, collaborative and build trust and if that happens those things will

Excerpts 0 to 7 of about 8 results.